Extraction Accuracy : Assura rcx vs Fire & Ice

Discussion in 'Cadence' started by quek.geo, Sep 7, 2005.

  1. quek.geo

    quek.geo Guest

    Hi

    Please help me to confirm if my knowledge on rcx and Fire & Ice is
    correct.

    When rcx is done using the standard options(without field solver),
    extraction is done in 2d mode and hence we can safely? say that Fire &
    Ice extraction is more accurate since it extracts in 3d(2.5d?) mode.

    However, if field solver is turned on, rcx would be more accurate than
    Fire and Ice because field solver gives a true 3d extraction whereas
    Fire and Ice does not give a true 3d extraction. Its 3d extraction mode
    is at best describe as 2.5d.

    Am I correct or am I totally off the point? Kindly comment, thanks. :)

    Products which I have in mind :
    ASSURA rcx : ver 3.1.3
    Fire & Ice QXT : 3.2


    Best regards
    Quek
     
    quek.geo, Sep 7, 2005
    #1
Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.
Similar Threads

  1. Multimachine problem with Assura RCX

  2. Assura RCX error: *FATAL* at "rex": res command file error - imcomplete ???

  3. Assura RCX

  4. Path extraction using Assura RCX

  5. RCX extraction of Power transistors

  6. RCX extraction problem in assura

  7. Assura RCX extraction with shorts ?

  8. What is relative accuracy and absolute accuracy?

Loading...